I've been struck by this exact observation many times. And every time I'm reminded of it it's a maddenly frustrating experience. It's very disheartening to me when authentic communication with another person becomes impossible.
Yeah because so much policy is libertarian like, like, wait there had to be something... Federal reserve system? Note.. Endless wars? The massive Ponzi scheme you call a retirement plan? His sanity billions of disgusts l dollars of corporate bailouts? COVID lockdowns? Nope. But keep telling yourself that libertarians are powerful.
"Hollywood's a mess..." "Ha! of course it is, with all the sexual abuse and..." "...because of the high minimum wage" "...oh. This is one of THOSE channels"
@@russellwboss Sometimes I wake up at night in cold sweat, after I had a nightmare where Jeff Bezos was not able to force his employees to pee in a bottle, and thus the valuation of amazon's worth increased at a slightly slower pace. Truly, it was terrifying.
Trade agreements can have devastating effects for local populations, causing their markets to go into crisis, people to migrate away seeking a living, increased organized crime, political upheaval... it's not precisely like shooting someone in the face, but it takes a deliberate lack of imagination to not call that "violence."
Tapped on this video to play it in the background, and I ACTUALLY KNOW THAT GUY! He was a pretty good drummer and composer in college and wanted to score movies/television/commercials. He was nice enough out of high school, but got less and less fun as he got out of college. He and his brother grew up in a rural-ish community in Nebraska, financially comfortable, went to public school, had a parent employed by public school, and Sean always seemed resentful about that kind of stuff. Resentful towards public schools, towards community, just a bit of a bummer to talk to. Nice to see his one or two Econ classes are still what he is drawing from 20 years later.
Lol this is hysterical. People like him think they’re so forward-thinking and independent while they disrespect the things other people constantly do to make their lives possible, exactly the thing they accuse everyone else of.
I went to a really underfunded public elementary school whose primary student population were children of migrant workers and military families. I wouldn't trade that experience for the world. Why would someone resent public school so much? I really don't understand these people.
This just makes me think he's even more of a scumbag? So he's completely comfortable on account of *other* people, but thinks of himself as a self-made man, out here to 'educate' people. What a twat.
So, this is wild, I knew him too, back in college when he was a composer (and not a bad one either!). And I considered us friends! However one day we got into an unfortunate argument about health care, I was actively sick and struggling to get coverage because this was before the ACA made pre-existing condition rejection illegal. He told me he wouldn’t want his money taken in the form of tax even if he knew it would directly save my life. I stopped being friends with him right there. I’m sorry, why would I want to be friends with someone who cares more about his principles than the real life right in front of him? Friendship over 😞 @ This argument and fallout happened, in fact, at a party.
Anyone who is claiming to not have a political affiliation is deceiving themselves. You may not be affiliated with a political party, but if you have any beliefs whatsoever, they are definitely going to align with a political term that is in some way controversial
If anyone says they're apolitical or centrist, I just assume they're ignorant &/or stealth libertarians. But it's a red flag bc it means someone isn't thoughtful in a fundamental way I value.
I dunno if you can count it as engagement, but I screamed "FUCK YOU, SEAN! FUCK YOU!!!!" at the screen repeatedly in the latter half of this video, so in my opinion UA-cam owes you at least $100.
The beauty of the Ghostbusters example is that while Peck is an asshole, he isnt entirely wrong. Venoman's response to being questioned by the EPA (justifiably) about what it is they do, is to lash out angrily, he doesnt consuly a lawyer, he doesnt do anything to assuage the concerns of government regulators, he threatens to sue someone. Worse is that the incredibly dangerous laser containment grid theyve got, is so unsafely designed, it can be shut down with the flip if a single switch.
Also, it was written into the movie that they were running out of ghost storage. Things would have gone wrong with or without the EPA. It’s just a matter of the problem arriving faster
Give me a conservative UA-camr and I'll show you a failed creative. So many of these people originally wanted to write movies and such but had no imagination for it. Ben Shapiro wanted to write movies but failed at it so he created the Daily Wire to rage at Hollywood for not picking him. I'm sure this guy was the same way.
Ben Shapiro even had an inside connection! His father worked in the industry. When nepotism doesn't get you in the door of the industry with THE MOST NEPOTISM then you know you can't write for shit. I mean, were taking absolute garbage if your dad's friends in the biz can't even punch your scripts up. Hollywood is known for turning dog water into Aquafina. If they can't find a single way to rework your script into something at least decent...well, we see what the outcome is. Now we all have to suffer Ben acting a fool until his final day.
@@ChristopherSadlowski "An inside connection" is underselling it, and his father's the least important part of it. His father is a composer who worked in Hollywood, while his mother was a TV Executive. You might also know his cousin, Mara Wilson, who played Matilda. He spent the entirety of his life in LA, being born there and studying political science at UCLA before finally leaving to go to Harvard. He had every door open for him when it came to get a job in Hollywood, but nobody wanted to buy his scripts.
I'm always confused by this strange idea that pro-capitalist (and especially the subset of so-called ''libertarians") have which is that trade = capitalism. That the existence of a market necessarily implies the existence of capitalism. It just isn't true. The existence of a market no more requires capitalism than the existence of a floor requires dancing. It's a bizarre conclusion to make if you have even a basic understanding of economics.
Do you suppose it's part of the Cold War capitalism vs communism dynamic? I notice there's this false dichotomy where people think it's all one or the other, so you can't criticize either without getting lumped in with some pretty extreme ideology.
@@eyesofthecervino3366 I suppose so but only in so far as our focus is on teaching capitalism and capitalism only. Which is not to say that people aren't aware of the existence of other socio-economic systems, since they clearly of know the word 'communism' if nothing more than as an epithet, but that they were taught the other systems were "just bad" without any honest, coherent, academic analysis of them beyond their alleged inferiority. And when you couple that with only referring to capitalistic ideals in high school and undergraduate course work in economics, it's easy to see how this could give ignorant and incurious people the impression that Economics/markets=capitalism and vice versa.
@@n0tthemessiah Your last comment hits the nail on the head, I think. We have something of a religious worldview about capitalism, just like how people who grow up in evangelical Christianity (as I did) come to see all of human behavior as explained by the frame of "original sin." It's hard to put that frame down once and for all, even once you've woken up to the fact it was hoodwinking you. The whole society insists on capitalism as the economic frame, and we can't even put food on the table for our kids without buying into it on some level.
the concept of cross community trade likely pre-dates organized agriculture because it turns out that the concept of going from a place to another place with a bag full of stuff that you think or know the other place doesn't have and exchanging it for something else doesn't exactly ask for many prerequisites
@@007kingifritBasing your ideology on something you red when you were 14 years old is definitely unwise... if that thing was Atlas Shrugged that makes it exponentionally worse.
@@Jaymaxair you show that you know nothing about humans, nearly everyone does this, that's why we call it your formative years that's about when you read karl marx huh? and what's wrong with atlas shrugged?
Actually, the part of "The Ghostbusters" that Shawn (with his second-grade understanding of the relationship between government and commerce) totally glosses over in his video is the part where Egon is explaining the crisis that they were quickly coming up against with the containment system and the amount of energy that was accumulating within it as a result of all the ghosts they were catching and storing. Even if the EPA inspector hadn't come in and shut down the containment system, thereby sparking the final crises of the movie, it was on its way. So, private enterprise was dealing with forces it didn't fully understand, and through its actions was creating a crises situation that was going to befall the city, one way or the other. The government was doing nothing more than what it is mandated to do by the people: To provide oversight and regulatory guidance to private enterprise that allows such commerce to take place safely, profitably, and for the benefit of the public. But Shawn, yeah, he just kinda breezes on by that, doesn't he?
was it unaffordable due to cost of regulation, tax, and elevated cost of mortgage due to tax, regulation, the state owning half the land West of the Mississippi, elevating the cost of land, rent, mortgage, housing? How much govt interference in the housing market in NYC? The idea there were no expenses beyond normal market conditions is absurd. Their inability to expand the containment was largely due to less profit than the market would provide per catch, if not for the state ripple effects from every direction distorting and deforming the otherwise free, lucrative, market. Oh, and they have corporate tort liability limits by being in business and having an LLC or incorporation...and that incentivizes harm too. It's crony captialism...as is IP (patents, etc. they might have). All encourages harm to consumers and others. All are state creations entirely.
I think part of the issue is that Venkman completely failed to cooperate or explain anything. He saw a guy was from the EPA, and rather than think "Oh, yeah, we are running a nuclear power plant in our garage, that guy should probably know we're competent" he told the guy to fuck off repeatedly, hoping he'd go away. Egon tried to explain the issue, but it was way too little, too late there. Venkman was more interested in dunking on a guy who is kind of annoying than actually being responsible or diligent with the thing that would've exploded the entire city.
Probably the best thing I've seen in ages. You gave me reason to smile, laugh and generally feel good. I'm in no doubt that this took a lot of work, and still you managed to make it look spontaneous, effortless and feel like a conversation. You closing point about art resonates with me so well, and I thank you for that. I've no idea about films really, neither have I seen that bloke or his videos - yet this was enjoyable to watch and learn from.
@@themorbidzoo Thanks for the nice reply. If you're interested in how a new viewer came to your channel - then it was from your commentary on The Thing. The link was due to seeing an Adam Savage video about his prop replica from the film - the spider head thing. However, that isn't a film I've seen, (nor most of the others in your listing if I'm honest). That doesn't matter though because it's the essay and the delivery that make them interesting and entertaining. You said that these essays would get a very limited reading in academic circles, and it's great that you're bringing the practice to a wider audience. I look forward to seeing more.
@@burramys ah thanks-- that is good to know, I'm glad the algorithm is steering it toward that kind of audience in particular. Thanks for sticking around!!
It’s funny about most of those “Ben Franklin” quotes: 99% of anything said from any of our founding fathers were said out of the context of being pressured. Even though we have several issues concerning our constitutional rights (freedom of speech, guns, right to a speedy trial, equal weight of the law regardless of protected class), we aren’t done so under pressure. Its a slow procession of state law and judicial understanding and people are mistaking the two 🤦♂️
I have a cultural theory that the reason the US deifies the founding fathers so much is because we're too young as a country to have organically developed myths and legends. We need a unifying example of national character, so we treat the founding fathers kind of like little-g gods. That prevents us from seeing the cultural context behind what they said that you're pointing out here. Thanks for the watch! :)
Here’s a fun Franklin quote most people haven’t heard 😉 “All the property that is necessary to a man for the conservation of the individual and his propagation of the species is his natural right, which none can justly deprive him of; but all property superfluous to such purposes is the property of the public, who by their laws have created it, and who may therefore by other laws dispose of it, whenever the welfare of the public shall demand such disposition.”
Yeesh I love this longform content for you. You're stylistically similar to a lot of other video essayists I love but you provide different angles to your critique that elevate your content that much further. I'm sure these take a long time but I'd definitely be interested in more deep dives like this from you in the future
20:05 I'm about to ask the rudest question, something you should never ask a screenwriter: "How many screenplays have you sold?" I've done my own research and, from what I can tell, zero. His only apparent writing credits are for 3 short films, all commissioned by Koch and available on their channel: 1) Locked Out: A documentary about an entrepreneur who wanted to open a hair braiding salon but was stopped by an evil local government who demanded she have a State License. (She needed to take a class and pay a fee.) 2) No Vans Land: a documentary about an entrepreneur who wanted to open a Van transportation company but was stopped by an evil local government who demanded he have a State License. (He wanted free access to pick up people from city bus stops, instead of acting as a normal taxi service.) 3) Fear of Farming: a documentary about an entrepreneur who wanted to open an organic farm but was stopped by an evil local government who demanded she have a State License. (From what I can tell, it was a stunt. She was a law student who started a controversy to get a bill passed, then gave up the farm and became a lobbyist.)
Why yes Sean, the East India Trading Company WAS a force for good and definitely did not lead to the colonization of an entire subcontinent that only ended in my grandfathers lifetime, ie. NOT VERY LONG AGO! Edit: I looked up at my screen at the exact time the shot of your dog appeared and instinctively cooed doggie, and so when their tail started wagging it was as if they had heard me, it absolutely made my day ❤
*Desperately trying and failing to not fangirl into oblivion* This was something else. I'm blown away. I think you have an incredible skill at balancing the 'facts' and 'feelings', so many other, your subject and myself included, veer way too hard one way or the other. Between this and the Spider-Gwen video, it's just so refreshing for someone to say that fictional things don't exist and the minutia of their specifics doesn't matter and cannot (and probably shouldn't be answered), while the pure enjoyment and/ or critique of art is equally as important as 'fictional facts' aren't. I can definitely nerd out about something like Warhammer 40K lore, but the implications of a satire of the British Empire and Thatcher becoming increasingly jingoistic and sincere in its presentation and stories, both influenced by and influencing its audience is far more interesting than arguing that girls can't be Space Marines because the codex days so - Astartes are all trans and the black carapace is a fancy boob job!). Anyways, you deserve your flowers and this guy needs a shitty yellow and black flag. Watching him made me crying into my red and black one lol. I'll leave you with this quote from Benjamin Franklin that one of your last points and quote instantly made me think of: "The philosophy of anarchism is included in the word “Liberty,” yet it is comprehensive enough to include all things else that are conducive to progress. No barriers whatever to human progression, to thought, or investigation are placed by anarchism; nothing is considered so true or so certain, that future discoveries may not prove it false; therefore, it has but one infallible, unchangeable motto, “Freedom”: Freedom to discover any truth, freedom to develop, to live naturally and fully. Other schools of thought are composed of crystallized ideas-principles that are caught and impaled between the planks of long platforms, and considered too sacred to be disturbed by a close investigation. In all other “issues” there is always a limit; some imaginary boundary line beyond which the searching mind dare not penetrate, lest some pet idea melt into a myth. But anarchism is the usher of science-the master of ceremonies to all forms of truth. It would remove all barriers between the human being and natural development. From the natural resources of the Earth, all artificial restrictions, that the body might be nurtured, and from universal truth, all bars of prejudice and superstition, that the mind may develop symmetrically." - Lucy Parsons
(Edit: just came back to this video and discovered the mess that is this comments replies. Ill write an entire 60 page essay on the fall of the icelandic commonwealth next time) Fun fact: we tried this libertarian thing in the past. The icelandic commenwealth, from the ninth till the twelth century. It was a massive failiure. It ended when the absolute majority of people voted for the King of norway to come in and take over. Libertarianism in practice sucked so much that people chose to invite a foreign despot to take over and opress them rather than live one more day in a anarcho-capitalist society
Also, the church began collecting taxes and created internal conflict. You could say it failed, or that religion destroyed another otherwise peaceful society.
The dark ages lasted 400 years too. Everything back then lasted a long time because most people were too miserable or dead to even begin to think about changing things.
I still remember during SPI we were talking about people not taking expertise seriously due to the American “oh I can learn/pick that up/do that as effectively.” Without any qualifications to do so... and Sean Malone encompasses this fully. 10/10 video
@@themorbidzoo looking forward to forcing my friends to view your block buster magnum opus Edward Cullen video, I know that will be an hour of IMMACULATE arguments
8:00 if i remember right the ghostbusters fought against regulation of their ghost catching weapons that could potentially destroy reality if handeled wrong. and then they do exactly this without knowing for sure if they would destroy the world. maybe over the top comedies are not a good example for making a point about economics?
"The difference is that the Austrian school makes the individual the key unit of decision making..." Sean, that's basically all of economics these days. That's not a difference. - Source: Be me, be economist. Cheers this video is brilliant! Thanks for pointing out education-propaganda and windbaggery!
I enjoy your videos and intellectual commentary on subjects that hit home for me personally! I had studied economics at a conservative university that touted Austrian school libertarianism and proudly called myself one a few years ago. I didn’t wind down that ideology until I worked in the corporate world and developed a chronic illness that made hospital visits mandatory. Once I started seeing how the “free” corporate market really worked in medical care and the ballooning costs I paid compared to other socialized countries, did I realize that true libertarianism could only stay in academia. I am by no means a communist or radical, but the very basis of free market theory centers around people being rational, and the more i read on economics, poverty studies, and social psychology, the more I became less of a person that believed everyone always made rational decisions for their benefit not could they in times of starving or desperation. And billionaires themselves gamed the system through cronyism, which cannot be stopped by an all-knowing free market, and that being poor wasn’t always just a personal choice.
Excellent video, I really appreciate the sincerity that you argued with. I'm really tired of super cynical criticism that assumes the worst in everything they argue and so your channel as always is a refreshing breath of fresh air please don't stop
I just found this channel today and it's so good. These essays are so well written and presented, I've watched like 8 of these videos over the past four hours.
I dont wanna become a cliche and just say something nice on every video but dunking on libertarians is genuinely my favorite passtime to such an extent i focused my college career on it so you force my hand This is just awesome, amazing work!
@@themorbidzoo unfortunately i am in covid college right now... but horror movies are my way out of feeling that slow creeping crawl of dread, the bomb above our heads of ecological collapse and the knowledge that anything that I do right now will do nothing to halt that encroaching judgement day... which is why I like your channel! Oh right my college. I am studying how political dissemination and radicalization occurs through the internet. And a lot of that involves the impact of channels like FEE, Steven Crowder and even PewDiePie on a person's ideology and where those changes take them. Which means it is just so cathartic to watch people just dunk on them for 44 minutes straight. The topic is so esoteric that I never get the opportunity to like just vent about how much I hate the channels without academic language so this type of video is my muse!!
@@shmuelhoit7118 Oh man, we're like the same person. I too have sunk so far into my dread that all I can do is try to laugh at the circus, and I too study internet ideology! Now is the time to discuss it, it's the forst time in history that the majority of people are able to communicate with thousands outside their immediate area, and we 1000% have not considered the consequences of that yet. At least it's good for content mining on my end, I'm going to talk about these things more, for sure. I'm really glad you're here for it!
@@themorbidzoo yea so now you probably get why when you were like "hey its politics time I'm talking about politics outside of attack on titan now and there will be no survivors" this became my favorite channel
Love how he uses Geralt (particularly THAT scene) to depict "rational and irrational decisions." Geralt, a man known for great pragmatism with other things, but when it comes to himself he may as well be riding his horse backwards with a bag on his head. It's what makes Geralt a compelling character. It's what makes good (frustrating) story.
It's also a comedy, it's supposed to be funny that they kind of know what they're doing and that the EPA is in the wrong. It's supposed to be funny that they discover ghosts are real and Venkman's first thought is how they're going to make a fortune from franchising. I don't think the libertarian stuff was supposed to be serious
@@RogueAstro85yeah it seems like the MOST surface reading level is: AGHHHHH!!!!! GHOSTS! DEMONS! GODS FROM ANOTHER WORLD!!!! OH GOD! better call those guys in jumpsuits 😏 they got a 1-800 number 😏
I feel like the entire point of the IDW comic series, especially the Ghost Smashers arc, was turning around and pissing all over the first movie's libertarian message. Walter Peck gets put in charge of a new government agency regulating companies that deal with the paranormal and while he and the Ghostbusters still don't get along, he's portrayed way more sympathetically. Instead of a smarmy, bureaucratic obstructionist he's become a hard-nosed disciplinarian who recognizes the value of the service the Ghostbusters provide and is determined to make damn sure they provide it properly, with minimal collateral damage.
If I remember correctly the government was pretty reasonable in being suspicious of the Ghostbusters. Their efforts to shut down the business were comical and exaggerated but rooted in not believing in ghosts. Making the discovery that ghosts are real and turning that into a business to have the monopoly on dealing with the consequences is also not beneficial to society by any stretch so even there the message isn't completely on board with libertarianism. It has been a while since I watched it so all my points may be wrong, this is just from the bits and pieces I think happened in the movie.
I have to say... I'm baffled that hardly anyone online even mentions Lieber having that weird association with libertarian hacks. It's just... there, I guess?
In Australia we have a concept called 'The Pub Test' - a standard for judging policies based on whether the average pub-goer would understand and approve of them. If we were to put Sean to a similar test, like "The Party Test" where the standard is whether a theory is likely to sour the mood at a social gathering, Sean would be asked to leave and receive no further invitation to any future events.
It was a special kind of fascinating when you flowed seamlessly into a poetic story and description of an ineffible malaise from a recognition that's just out of reach, in a 45 minute video about a completely different topic. To add another layer to it, I realized that I had found this video two years ago and was then captivated by the same passage. Maybe the almost-but-not-quite memory of it is what's been bugging me this whole time...
Okay so like i agree fully but also *why is nobody else talking about this* That monologue was phenomenal, and theres *no* reference to it in the comments wtf!?
I am very much not finished this, but the whole Wakanda thing is funny. It's like the Tories in the UK post-Brexit saying they want to be more like Singapore, and saying that's done through free trade. In actual fact Singapore's economy is VERY protectionist, planned, top-down and their government has very strict control over what goes on in the country. That has made them very rich.
"Countries that dont participate in trade are doomed" The absolute CAJONES to say that on a movie about fictional sovereign AFRICAN nation. Would he like to explain to us how or why that is? I'd love to hear him stumble his way through that. What do we do to the global south if they don't play with us, SEAN????!?!??!!
i think what he's saying is that a free market is so vastly superior to any other wealth generation method that it is impossible to compete and thus impossible to survive without trading.......not sure what bringing up the "global south" has to do with any of that
@@007kingifrit What happens when countries don't participate? Do they get out-competed over time or do they get Gaddafi'd instantly? Provide examples please, thank you.
@@bsh819 both depending on how much of a nuisance they are (i can't see my original comment so i have no choice but to guess from context btw) for example after the korean war for 20 years north korea was a richer place than south korea....now it has totally reversed.
36:55 You basically stated here _exactly_ why I identify as a general leftist, and nothing more specific than that. I'm not an anarchist, I'm not a ML, I'm not a Maoist, I wouldn't even say I'm DemSoc. All I know is I'm somewhere left of SocDem. I don't find subscribing to a particular lane all that useful. We need to be able to adapt and always consider what's best for people both now and down the line, and what that looks like is always going to change. If you get rigid in your thinking then that hammer/nail analogy starts applying--you bend society to fit your solution instead of bending your solution to account for society.
Same with me. In truth I wouldn’t even ascribe myself a label. I guess my position is just “whatever leads to the best material outcomes for the most amount of people” which seems to be somewhere around social democracy.
@@007kingifrit Why, simply because I don't see the need to limit myself to the rigidity of pre-defined ideologies? I know which direction I want to move material outcomes. I know what rights I would like to see preserved and/or fulfilled. And I have ideas on solutions to these that don't fall under establishment leftist theory, but would be considered leftist in their core philosophy. I am also willing to alter my solutions and try new things as new evidence presents itself. How is that insufficient?
@@Crazy_Diamond_75 you don't need to "limit yourself" meaning you don't feel the need to......actually believe set things? yes, that's a bad thing, it means you're just gana change what you claim to believe everytime and thus never be wrong. its cowardly and dishonest. its a great way to lie to yourself. rather the true answer is you DO have a rigid defined ideology like all humans but you are fooling yourself and going "nuh uh i didn't believe that" each time you end up being wrong
This was a brilliant rebuttal! I love your explanation of art as a party - I never would've thought of it that way, and now I'll probably never stop thinking of it that way. Libertarians commonly live inside the "faith" of their ideology, it seems. For instance, they glorify private contracts as perfect legal mechanisms which replace the very need for any goverment, but just put to them the very simple question of how on earth any contract can possibly be enforced without a government granted a monopoly on the legal use of force - and watch their heads explode. They can't wrap their minds around the question. As far as they can see, "it'll just sort itself out." On the one hand, they won't admit a truly libertarian society, sans government, would just devolve into "might makes right," because then their ideology looks barbaric. On the other hand, they can't explain what the reasonable, viable alternative is supposed to be without resorting to a model that looks exactly like ... drum roll ... a government granted a monopoly on the legal use of force. Their cognitive dissonance is entertaining, as long as you don't let yourself think about the fact that Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" is former House Speaker Paul Ryan's favorite book and that clown got to make decisions about who could get welfare.
I watch this video every month or two, and I only now realized that Sean's continued complaining about "central planning" is completely at odds with his championing of the entrepreneur. I don’t know if anyone's told him this, but most businesses have a top-down hierarchy, whether the decision makers are a single owner, partners, or C-suite and board. So, they are centrally planned. And I'm fascinated by the cognitive dissonance that's required to hold such his beliefs.
True, it's a very good ideal for studying economics! But by itself, historical materialism doesn't mean much besides being a methodological approach-- society is the result of conditions, not ideals. A proper Austrian would say the exact same thing. Sean is a rube who doesn't know what he's talking about, but I guarantee you he wouldn't disagree with that statement either. The counterpoint from an Austrian perspective would be "the conditions of the modern worker are being artificially constrained by government intervention," which is just as unfalsifiable as "the conditions of the modern worker are artificially constrained by capitalism." I happen to suspect that the conditions of the worker are absolutely constrained by capitalism, but unless I can incontrovertibly prove why, my personal beliefs are really not very actionable, and *certainly* not relevant to economics as a field. This is the root of all the circular arguments between communists and capitalists.
@@themorbidzoo very VERY late response but, I agree with the thesis of what you say, yeah. For what is worth, I consider myself a socialist and my perspective is very much informed in Marxism, but I 100% agree that Marxism, or in this case specifically historical materialism, is a method of analysis, and I think that once communists start to treat it like a natural science then they have lost the plot entirely, within Marxism itself even. I am willing to admit that I'm far more partial to a Marxist perspective because I personally have a bias towards the working class (my class, go figure). To the dismay of economists around the world that are bitter about the fact that they can't turn economics into a hard science like physics, economics is a social science, there's perspectives, methods and frameworks that help us make sense of the impossibly complex dynamics society but at some point biases need to take place. Admittedly, I'm not very familiar with Austrian economics, but there are other stuff from Marxism to like, less in the area of economics and more in the area of sociology, like the conflict theory or idea of the structure and super structure I don't know if I agree with your conclusion, however. That our believes are not really very actionable, at least not in this case, because as you said, is unfalsifiable, we have hit and axiom I think. To prove incontrovertibly if the material conditions of the working class are constrained by capitalism or not is another question in disguise I think: what type of economic system we ought to build, one for the businesses and those who own them (in which case, is already built and the question is do we keep it?) or one for the working class? I'm not convinced we can build one where both interests can be upheld at the same time long term globally, we of course won't be able to find that answer as an absolute fact like we wold if it were a matter of smashing subatomic particles together, none the less, we need to build a society
@@themorbidzoo Also A Very Late Response, but the alligence to falsifiability, that most modern economic thought is based in, as a means to seperate the valid and the invalid or as you say the actionable and the inactionable isn't justifiable. Falsifiabilty conceptually is a means to an end, it's a way of papering over the deeper ideological inconsistencies of Capitalism without having to take a step back and really come to terms with the greater idealistic and material implications of economics as a disciple. Falsifiability allows for a moment to moment pragmatic decision making as generalized economic hueristics fail to account for observed behavior, but is by definition unable to see the forest for the trees. It is unable to as Kuhn put shift the paradigm. To give an example supply and demand as a heuristic works generally but breaks down often when examing a commodity that is required to maintain life if not direct as in the curves no longer match, but practically as food prices become untenably expensive. Falsifiabilty helps with this by providing a frame to build up and around these issues, but falsifiability will never give you the indication that supply and demand applied to commodity is just not a very good heuristic. This inability to creatively its way out of the paper bag is I think serverly overlooked, as bucking falsifiability is akin to bucking the scientific method in economic circles, as far as I am aware ( like Sean I'm not a classically trained economist, just a lowely critical theorist :). I think the parallels that you are drawing in the video and comment between Austrian school and marxist/ Frankfurt school as being unfalsifiable therefore inactionable is jumping the gun so to speak. This dichotomy you are drawing is one based in the idea that Austrian school is on the same ideological scope is reductive even if on the surface they seem equitable, as it equates a specific subset of applicable economic ideals applicable within an economic framework with a school of thought that offers an alternative to the power dynamics and forces present in the former. At some point your pragmatism is going to run up against a systematic problem of having to be based on unfalsifiable ideals that you will be forced to swallow as axiomatic, unless you're a post-structuralist....maybe...probably not. I'll stop here as a youtube comment isn't this serious and should stop taking it as such. P.S. I Just found your channel and I really enjoy it, sorry to leave a sorta schizo comment that is critical on a two year old video, but this point about falsifiability is just one of my bugbears from undergrad that I get irrationally heated about.
@@themorbidzooThis is such an eloquent and intelligent breakdown of the argument from all sides, I feel it should be framed somewhere instead of just hanging around in a comment.
hi! i know some economics and i read capital -the first "constraint" capitalism forces upon the modern worker is forcing them to become a propertyless worker or starve. see: the enclosures in britain and ireland, and other instances of accumulation at the expense of peasants. - the second is that capitalists as a whole have to deprive their labor force of compensation for some of their hours worked in order to make a profit at all. the math just doesnt work out otherwise. -the third is that capitalism creates the conditions for production to be more socialized and collectively organized than at any previous point in history - in fact it is fundamental to the system - but at the same time production's private ownership for profit restrains the potential of this socialization. these tendencies are fundamentally antagonistic, and while the latter can overcome the former, the former cannot overcome the latter.
Also, your videos on films are so succinct and to the point and thankfully devoid of the lofi crap most of these channels use. It's becoming a joke how manufactured most of these video essays feel. Keep up the good work, this channel has great content!
Thank you!! Ha, it's gotten to a point where I'll be picking music and think "this is nice" and then "no wait, too lo-fi." There aren't that many video essay cliches but boy is that one of them and boy does Sean love it
@@themorbidzoo I just imagine them sitting in a room full of Kubrick posters, wearing a sleeveless tank top and listening to a poorly mixed dubstep cover of Louis Armstrong they're going to use for the video and saying to themselves "this will totally get me laid".
This has been in my Watch Later for like a month, but in that time, I saw a bunch of your more recent videos, all of which were pretty tonally different from this one. I love your content and the format in which you present your insights, but this video is probably my favorite you've done. Cheers!
When I first found saw your stuff in my recommended, I expected some cheesy horror channel based on the name. Can't say how glad I am that I was wrong. Great video. You have a fantastic presentation style! I've enjoyed all of your content so far.
My favorite thing about libertarians is how they will almost never acknowledge all the ways corporations and accumulations of Capital are functionally identical to states and are nearly equally capable of tyranny.
"ralph doesnt feel like a bad guy bc he never was one" ???? whfkejdkdj?????? im dying he delivers the line like it's some niche fan theory and not the premise of the movie im so lost
Trade and commerce are the opposite of violence Yeah, sure. That's why it's been only a couple hundred years since the 'trading' ships stopped pirating others on their way to a port. Cities' walls and guards were (and still are, pretty much) the only thing that kept 'fair traders' from just taking whatever they wished and leave. And even that wasn't a guarantee, as the 'merchants' could bring a few dozens more ships to take the city for the sake of marauding and control.
Showing my own bias here for sure, but the phrase "trade is the opposite of violence" absolutely stunned me. That is such a fundamentally baffling thing to say that I don't know how to respond. Does this man really think that trade is the same thing as community or caring about other people???
@@themorbidzoo Dear god. Is it also a tenet of Austrian economics that it is impossible to dislike someone who is currently at their job? Bc that is the only way I can make sense of thinking that inequality can be solved by everyone thinking of each other as colleagues.
@@themorbidzoo Thank you so much for your insight, I need to go put my brain in a goldfish bowl so it can swim around and be cleansed of this nightmare.
Wait, this is a real, subsidized foundation? I thought it was just the name of his channel… 😒 Edit: Damn, they're even on Wiki. "…founded in 1946, is considered the oldest free-market think tank in the United States." 🤷♂
There are a lot of these. Capitalists spend a lot of money on people who tell workers life will be better for workers if capitalists are allowed to do whatever they want.
In several small businesses I helped run we would never ask "How can we create value for the customer?" LOL it sounds childishly earnest. We might ask "WHAT DO WE SAY when the customer asks how we create value for them?", or how do we get them to think we create value. (even though a lot of times the answer was to actually provide more value) "Business" (as in "doing business") is almost entirely about using information, financial, or power asymmetries to get extra value. Advertising is entirely about that, and is a drain on society (assuming all that artistic genius still gets expressed in some form). I think of that as close to a definition, because when you are simply about creating value, you are not "doing business", you are just working. Everything else you do that's not that, ends up being some form of asymmetry exploitation. "Business" is the part of work/productive life that effectively makes capitalism feel different for the average worker, and it's just the result of the legal system regulating business and private property (not to mention the tax system) encourages ownership of all business by a ever-concentrating group of megawealthy. There's nothing more "natural" or "free" about our system. Rather, it was designed, usually explicitly, to try and balance competing forces at different time periods, or reflect the desires of a newly dominant class or group.
Late to this party, but I find it so hilarious/frustrating that people miss the toddler level symbolism in Jurassic Park. I don't know how much more simply you can put "We will be destroyed by the monsters we create when we turn to science for reckless profiteering".
You do such a great job debunking the FEE guy (srsly thank you) but i would like to point out that there is also some unexamided ideology in this video. I just have to point out that the "problem" with capitalism, as far as its critics are concerned, is not that people cheat the system. The problem is that it depends on exploitation to work. Also, and this is something really endemic in anglophone UA-cam, Marxism in general is not as frowned upon in academia as you make it seem. Outside the US - where people are ideologically indisposed to it - Marxism is not frowned upon at all. It is a legitimate form of criticism and some of Marx's ideas are foundational to Sociology as a scientific field. (Meanwhile Liberalism gets great treatment despite being philosophically moribund for 50 years) Please do jot take this as an attack, and keep making great content
I agree with one of your central arguments about films not being 1:1 replica of reality. It reminded me of Bordwell who wrote about various criteria when judging the film - among them two which are common among lay people watching films just for fun, without any deeper analysis: moral criteria and realistic criteria. I think this guy is stuck with these when he's doing his analysis - it's like watching historian talking very negatively about lord of the rings or even some good historical pic because it's nor "realistic". This guy is also adding his moral criteria of free-market utopia propaganda and and its promises of individual freedom and prosperity. And he just don't see things like complexity of film or innovation, coherence etc. - actually analysing it as an art form, you know, the thing it is meant to be.
You are the most iconic film/video essayist I’ve ever had the privilege of seeing. This is like peak content, and I know it’s like old stuff but like holy fuck this was so well written
23:06 for example. I recently had to take a macroeconomics course, a topic I never had interest in. Now I have a better understanding of the world we live in! And now I’m watching videos like this!! And now I want to take microeconomics! I never thought I’d like econ cause it’s math! YET HERE I AM
It's interesting though now that he mentions it that one of the villains of the original "Ghost Busters" which came out right in the middle of the Reagan administration (a time when the solar panels Carter installed on the White House roof were ripped down mind you) was a somewhat foppish member of the EPA who has the absolute audacity to be concerned that a building in the middle of one of the busiest cities on the planet is omitting high amounts of radiation & at the end the self made business men not only save the day, one of them also gets the girl they never would in real life & are beloved the world over & one of our heroes is more concerned about the giant stay puffed marshmallow man damaging a church than all the other meham & destruction it's causing. Tim Heidecker once pointed out in an interview that Reagan era comedies often made us root for protagonists who were huge jerks, rather than making them the butt of jokes like with "It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia" two decades later. When you consider these facts it's really no huge surprise that a libertarian would use this film as an example in his video, or that a bunch of right-wing trolls would get all bent out of shape about an all female reboot.🙄
The problem with a complete free market is that it allows to much room for a corporation to find loopholes in the already loose regulations we have. The idea of “Private ownership” only works and makes sense in the context of a small, family owned business that only has at most a dozen or so employees, not for these mega companies and corporations who have the workforce the size of some smaller countries. There needs to be some government intervention in order to make sure everyone’s rights and equalities are protected. Saying that regulating the “free market” is bad is like saying “laws” are bad because they regulate people.
Gotta love how it's "bad" for the government to regulate the ghostbusters who not only have actual nuclear weapons but also literally made a business out of catching and imprisoning human souls.
I remember those films had a different main character actress even tho the character was the same. 3 films, 3 different leading ladies playing the same person.
I remember reading an anarcho capitalist book called Restoring The American Dream by a chap named Robert Ringer. It's one of the best pieces of lurid, sensationalist fiction I've read. Better than Robert E. Howard's Conan stories.
You’ll never get a person to understand something that their livelihood depends on them misunderstanding.
- Benjamin Franklin
I've been struck by this exact observation many times. And every time I'm reminded of it it's a maddenly frustrating experience.
It's very disheartening to me when authentic communication with another person becomes impossible.
Not just their livelihood, these days it's their fragile worldview.
I think the same can be said of anyone from any demographic, especially those who believe in false dichotomies
And you’ll never get someone to admit they’re wrong when their sense of righteousness depends on their misinformed stance.🤡
"Im not a shill i just write propaganda videos for one of the most powerful right wing think tanks in American history."
I'm not a bitter guy who can't sell a script ..It's the collective lefties that keep my talent being recognized !
Yeah because so much policy is libertarian like, like, wait there had to be something... Federal reserve system? Note.. Endless wars? The massive Ponzi scheme you call a retirement plan? His sanity billions of disgusts l dollars of corporate bailouts? COVID lockdowns? Nope. But keep telling yourself that libertarians are powerful.
"Hollywood's a mess..."
"Ha! of course it is, with all the sexual abuse and..."
"...because of the high minimum wage"
"...oh. This is one of THOSE channels"
This is exactly what my mind went to as well 😂
They always point out a problem but blame the wrong cause
Don't forget unions! Lol. Everyone knows collective bargaining is a one way track to dystopia.
/s
@@russellwboss Sometimes I wake up at night in cold sweat, after I had a nightmare where Jeff Bezos was not able to force his employees to pee in a bottle, and thus the valuation of amazon's worth increased at a slightly slower pace.
Truly, it was terrifying.
“Trade and commerce are the opposite of violence”
Explain the Opium Wars, Sean.
Or basically any modern war
Conveniently ignoring the period of time when *people* were trade and commerce.
Unless he thinks the Atlantic slave trade wasn't violent somehow
@@davidtaylor142or a lot of ancient ones too
Trade agreements can have devastating effects for local populations, causing their markets to go into crisis, people to migrate away seeking a living, increased organized crime, political upheaval... it's not precisely like shooting someone in the face, but it takes a deliberate lack of imagination to not call that "violence."
explain all trade, sean
I knew this would be cursed as soon as the video claimed Hollywood was failing because of "hyper-unionization" instead of, ya know, the exact opposite
Dem freaking Commies ruin everything! 💩
Tapped on this video to play it in the background, and I ACTUALLY KNOW THAT GUY! He was a pretty good drummer and composer in college and wanted to score movies/television/commercials. He was nice enough out of high school, but got less and less fun as he got out of college. He and his brother grew up in a rural-ish community in Nebraska, financially comfortable, went to public school, had a parent employed by public school, and Sean always seemed resentful about that kind of stuff. Resentful towards public schools, towards community, just a bit of a bummer to talk to. Nice to see his one or two Econ classes are still what he is drawing from 20 years later.
Lol this is hysterical. People like him think they’re so forward-thinking and independent while they disrespect the things other people constantly do to make their lives possible, exactly the thing they accuse everyone else of.
I went to a really underfunded public elementary school whose primary student population were children of migrant workers and military families. I wouldn't trade that experience for the world. Why would someone resent public school so much? I really don't understand these people.
This just makes me think he's even more of a scumbag? So he's completely comfortable on account of *other* people, but thinks of himself as a self-made man, out here to 'educate' people.
What a twat.
So, this is wild, I knew him too, back in college when he was a composer (and not a bad one either!). And I considered us friends! However one day we got into an unfortunate argument about health care, I was actively sick and struggling to get coverage because this was before the ACA made pre-existing condition rejection illegal. He told me he wouldn’t want his money taken in the form of tax even if he knew it would directly save my life. I stopped being friends with him right there. I’m sorry, why would I want to be friends with someone who cares more about his principles than the real life right in front of him? Friendship over 😞 @
This argument and fallout happened, in fact, at a party.
I met him too! In a safari in Africa. Crazy!
Anyone who is claiming to not have a political affiliation is deceiving themselves. You may not be affiliated with a political party, but if you have any beliefs whatsoever, they are definitely going to align with a political term that is in some way controversial
The personal is political!
If anyone says they're apolitical or centrist, I just assume they're ignorant &/or stealth libertarians. But it's a red flag bc it means someone isn't thoughtful in a fundamental way I value.
I dunno if you can count it as engagement, but I screamed "FUCK YOU, SEAN! FUCK YOU!!!!" at the screen repeatedly in the latter half of this video, so in my opinion UA-cam owes you at least $100.
The beauty of the Ghostbusters example is that while Peck is an asshole, he isnt entirely wrong. Venoman's response to being questioned by the EPA (justifiably) about what it is they do, is to lash out angrily, he doesnt consuly a lawyer, he doesnt do anything to assuage the concerns of government regulators, he threatens to sue someone.
Worse is that the incredibly dangerous laser containment grid theyve got, is so unsafely designed, it can be shut down with the flip if a single switch.
No backup generator, no backup control system, no physical containment to mitigate or channel the potential explosive forces.
A barely tested nuclear powered device located in the middle of densely populated city.
Also, it was written into the movie that they were running out of ghost storage. Things would have gone wrong with or without the EPA. It’s just a matter of the problem arriving faster
Give me a conservative UA-camr and I'll show you a failed creative. So many of these people originally wanted to write movies and such but had no imagination for it. Ben Shapiro wanted to write movies but failed at it so he created the Daily Wire to rage at Hollywood for not picking him. I'm sure this guy was the same way.
*cough* a specific mustache man *cough* art school *cough*
@@JordanJumpindamn 😂
Ben Shapiro even had an inside connection! His father worked in the industry. When nepotism doesn't get you in the door of the industry with THE MOST NEPOTISM then you know you can't write for shit. I mean, were taking absolute garbage if your dad's friends in the biz can't even punch your scripts up. Hollywood is known for turning dog water into Aquafina. If they can't find a single way to rework your script into something at least decent...well, we see what the outcome is. Now we all have to suffer Ben acting a fool until his final day.
just like their boy A.Hitty
@@ChristopherSadlowski "An inside connection" is underselling it, and his father's the least important part of it. His father is a composer who worked in Hollywood, while his mother was a TV Executive. You might also know his cousin, Mara Wilson, who played Matilda. He spent the entirety of his life in LA, being born there and studying political science at UCLA before finally leaving to go to Harvard. He had every door open for him when it came to get a job in Hollywood, but nobody wanted to buy his scripts.
I'm always confused by this strange idea that pro-capitalist (and especially the subset of so-called ''libertarians") have which is that trade = capitalism. That the existence of a market necessarily implies the existence of capitalism. It just isn't true. The existence of a market no more requires capitalism than the existence of a floor requires dancing. It's a bizarre conclusion to make if you have even a basic understanding of economics.
Ugh, preach
Do you suppose it's part of the Cold War capitalism vs communism dynamic? I notice there's this false dichotomy where people think it's all one or the other, so you can't criticize either without getting lumped in with some pretty extreme ideology.
@@eyesofthecervino3366 I suppose so but only in so far as our focus is on teaching capitalism and capitalism only. Which is not to say that people aren't aware of the existence of other socio-economic systems, since they clearly of know the word 'communism' if nothing more than as an epithet, but that they were taught the other systems were "just bad" without any honest, coherent, academic analysis of them beyond their alleged inferiority. And when you couple that with only referring to capitalistic ideals in high school and undergraduate course work in economics, it's easy to see how this could give ignorant and incurious people the impression that Economics/markets=capitalism and vice versa.
@@n0tthemessiah Your last comment hits the nail on the head, I think. We have something of a religious worldview about capitalism, just like how people who grow up in evangelical Christianity (as I did) come to see all of human behavior as explained by the frame of "original sin." It's hard to put that frame down once and for all, even once you've woken up to the fact it was hoodwinking you. The whole society insists on capitalism as the economic frame, and we can't even put food on the table for our kids without buying into it on some level.
the concept of cross community trade likely pre-dates organized agriculture because it turns out that the concept of going from a place to another place with a bag full of stuff that you think or know the other place doesn't have and exchanging it for something else doesn't exactly ask for many prerequisites
Benjamin Franklin once said "When I was 14 I read Atlas Shrugged and it informed my decisions ever since.".
would that be a bad thing? aren't those the exact formative years when we do form our lifelong values and interpretations based on what we read?
Benny was too much of a hedonist to be into that kinda nerd shit. A 14 year old whose reading Atlas Shrugged is guaranteed maidenless
Hey, he could have been one of those Andrew Tate types.
@@007kingifritBasing your ideology on something you red when you were 14 years old is definitely unwise... if that thing was Atlas Shrugged that makes it exponentionally worse.
@@Jaymaxair you show that you know nothing about humans, nearly everyone does this, that's why we call it your formative years
that's about when you read karl marx huh? and what's wrong with atlas shrugged?
Actually, the part of "The Ghostbusters" that Shawn (with his second-grade understanding of the relationship between government and commerce) totally glosses over in his video is the part where Egon is explaining the crisis that they were quickly coming up against with the containment system and the amount of energy that was accumulating within it as a result of all the ghosts they were catching and storing. Even if the EPA inspector hadn't come in and shut down the containment system, thereby sparking the final crises of the movie, it was on its way. So, private enterprise was dealing with forces it didn't fully understand, and through its actions was creating a crises situation that was going to befall the city, one way or the other. The government was doing nothing more than what it is mandated to do by the people: To provide oversight and regulatory guidance to private enterprise that allows such commerce to take place safely, profitably, and for the benefit of the public.
But Shawn, yeah, he just kinda breezes on by that, doesn't he?
was it unaffordable due to cost of regulation, tax, and elevated cost of mortgage due to tax, regulation, the state owning half the land West of the Mississippi, elevating the cost of land, rent, mortgage, housing? How much govt interference in the housing market in NYC? The idea there were no expenses beyond normal market conditions is absurd. Their inability to expand the containment was largely due to less profit than the market would provide per catch, if not for the state ripple effects from every direction distorting and deforming the otherwise free, lucrative, market.
Oh, and they have corporate tort liability limits by being in business and having an LLC or incorporation...and that incentivizes harm too. It's crony captialism...as is IP (patents, etc. they might have). All encourages harm to consumers and others. All are state creations entirely.
“The government did exactly what it was supposed to do and made the situation infinitely worse” is not the epic takedown you think it is lol
I think part of the issue is that Venkman completely failed to cooperate or explain anything. He saw a guy was from the EPA, and rather than think "Oh, yeah, we are running a nuclear power plant in our garage, that guy should probably know we're competent" he told the guy to fuck off repeatedly, hoping he'd go away. Egon tried to explain the issue, but it was way too little, too late there. Venkman was more interested in dunking on a guy who is kind of annoying than actually being responsible or diligent with the thing that would've exploded the entire city.
Probably the best thing I've seen in ages. You gave me reason to smile, laugh and generally feel good. I'm in no doubt that this took a lot of work, and still you managed to make it look spontaneous, effortless and feel like a conversation. You closing point about art resonates with me so well, and I thank you for that. I've no idea about films really, neither have I seen that bloke or his videos - yet this was enjoyable to watch and learn from.
I'm gonna ride the high of this comment for at least a week. Thanks so much for the kind words and for watching! ❤
@@themorbidzoo Thanks for the nice reply. If you're interested in how a new viewer came to your channel - then it was from your commentary on The Thing. The link was due to seeing an Adam Savage video about his prop replica from the film - the spider head thing. However, that isn't a film I've seen, (nor most of the others in your listing if I'm honest). That doesn't matter though because it's the essay and the delivery that make them interesting and entertaining. You said that these essays would get a very limited reading in academic circles, and it's great that you're bringing the practice to a wider audience. I look forward to seeing more.
@@burramys ah thanks-- that is good to know, I'm glad the algorithm is steering it toward that kind of audience in particular. Thanks for sticking around!!
Unsure why this was randomly proffered to me now but anyway, ditto original posting.
It’s funny about most of those “Ben Franklin” quotes: 99% of anything said from any of our founding fathers were said out of the context of being pressured. Even though we have several issues concerning our constitutional rights (freedom of speech, guns, right to a speedy trial, equal weight of the law regardless of protected class), we aren’t done so under pressure. Its a slow procession of state law and judicial understanding and people are mistaking the two 🤦♂️
I have a cultural theory that the reason the US deifies the founding fathers so much is because we're too young as a country to have organically developed myths and legends. We need a unifying example of national character, so we treat the founding fathers kind of like little-g gods. That prevents us from seeing the cultural context behind what they said that you're pointing out here. Thanks for the watch! :)
@@themorbidzooRight on the money. Search for American Civil Religion if you haven't already.
Here’s a fun Franklin quote most people haven’t heard 😉 “All the property that is necessary to a man for the conservation of the individual and his propagation of the species is his natural right, which none can justly deprive him of; but all property superfluous to such purposes is the property of the public, who by their laws have created it, and who may therefore by other laws dispose of it, whenever the welfare of the public shall demand such disposition.”
@@themorbidzooI'm late to this, but I think the US does have organically developed myths and legends... they're just mostly from black communities
Unrelated: here in 2024 it's absolutely wild to hear people talk about the lockdown as current events 😂
Yeesh I love this longform content for you. You're stylistically similar to a lot of other video essayists I love but you provide different angles to your critique that elevate your content that much further. I'm sure these take a long time but I'd definitely be interested in more deep dives like this from you in the future
Omg you're the best. Thanks! Working on another pretty longform one now
@@themorbidzoo awesome! I'm looking forward to it 😊
20:05 I'm about to ask the rudest question, something you should never ask a screenwriter: "How many screenplays have you sold?"
I've done my own research and, from what I can tell, zero. His only apparent writing credits are for 3 short films, all commissioned by Koch and available on their channel:
1) Locked Out: A documentary about an entrepreneur who wanted to open a hair braiding salon but was stopped by an evil local government who demanded she have a State License. (She needed to take a class and pay a fee.)
2) No Vans Land: a documentary about an entrepreneur who wanted to open a Van transportation company but was stopped by an evil local government who demanded he have a State License. (He wanted free access to pick up people from city bus stops, instead of acting as a normal taxi service.)
3) Fear of Farming: a documentary about an entrepreneur who wanted to open an organic farm but was stopped by an evil local government who demanded she have a State License. (From what I can tell, it was a stunt. She was a law student who started a controversy to get a bill passed, then gave up the farm and became a lobbyist.)
... Did... Did he really call it No Vans land?? I get naming stuff is hard but did he really stick with the first idea that popped into his head?
The level of grift you need to reach to be able to sell the same concept 3 separate times is kinda impressive.
Why yes Sean, the East India Trading Company WAS a force for good and definitely did not lead to the colonization of an entire subcontinent that only ended in my grandfathers lifetime, ie. NOT VERY LONG AGO!
Edit: I looked up at my screen at the exact time the shot of your dog appeared and instinctively cooed doggie, and so when their tail started wagging it was as if they had heard me, it absolutely made my day ❤
*Desperately trying and failing to not fangirl into oblivion*
This was something else. I'm blown away. I think you have an incredible skill at balancing the 'facts' and 'feelings', so many other, your subject and myself included, veer way too hard one way or the other. Between this and the Spider-Gwen video, it's just so refreshing for someone to say that fictional things don't exist and the minutia of their specifics doesn't matter and cannot (and probably shouldn't be answered), while the pure enjoyment and/ or critique of art is equally as important as 'fictional facts' aren't. I can definitely nerd out about something like Warhammer 40K lore, but the implications of a satire of the British Empire and Thatcher becoming increasingly jingoistic and sincere in its presentation and stories, both influenced by and influencing its audience is far more interesting than arguing that girls can't be Space Marines because the codex days so - Astartes are all trans and the black carapace is a fancy boob job!).
Anyways, you deserve your flowers and this guy needs a shitty yellow and black flag. Watching him made me crying into my red and black one lol.
I'll leave you with this quote from Benjamin Franklin that one of your last points and quote instantly made me think of:
"The philosophy of anarchism is included in the word “Liberty,” yet it is comprehensive enough to include all things else that are conducive to progress. No barriers whatever to human progression, to thought, or investigation are placed by anarchism; nothing is considered so true or so certain, that future discoveries may not prove it false; therefore, it has but one infallible, unchangeable motto, “Freedom”: Freedom to discover any truth, freedom to develop, to live naturally and fully. Other schools of thought are composed of crystallized ideas-principles that are caught and impaled between the planks of long platforms, and considered too sacred to be disturbed by a close investigation. In all other “issues” there is always a limit; some imaginary boundary line beyond which the searching mind dare not penetrate, lest some pet idea melt into a myth. But anarchism is the usher of science-the master of ceremonies to all forms of truth. It would remove all barriers between the human being and natural development. From the natural resources of the Earth, all artificial restrictions, that the body might be nurtured, and from universal truth, all bars of prejudice and superstition, that the mind may develop symmetrically."
- Lucy Parsons
Gaah thank you! That quote is beautiful 😭
"intellectually immature chicken-sh*t", this is quickly becoming one of my favorite channels
(Edit: just came back to this video and discovered the mess that is this comments replies. Ill write an entire 60 page essay on the fall of the icelandic commonwealth next time) Fun fact: we tried this libertarian thing in the past. The icelandic commenwealth, from the ninth till the twelth century. It was a massive failiure. It ended when the absolute majority of people voted for the King of norway to come in and take over. Libertarianism in practice sucked so much that people chose to invite a foreign despot to take over and opress them rather than live one more day in a anarcho-capitalist society
Lol, love this 😄
Also, the church began collecting taxes and created internal conflict. You could say it failed, or that religion destroyed another otherwise peaceful society.
sooooo it lasted 400 years?
The dark ages lasted 400 years too. Everything back then lasted a long time because most people were too miserable or dead to even begin to think about changing things.
@@borneoorangutan apples to oranges, that's not a civilization, it's an "age"
any civilization lasting 400 years is doing pretty good
"Theory-induced blindness" just sounds like confirmation bias
I still remember during SPI we were talking about people not taking expertise seriously due to the American “oh I can learn/pick that up/do that as effectively.” Without any qualifications to do so... and Sean Malone encompasses this fully. 10/10 video
Lol exaaaaactly. Dunning-Kruger bby
@@themorbidzoo looking forward to forcing my friends to view your block buster magnum opus Edward Cullen video, I know that will be an hour of IMMACULATE arguments
@@jojomojo712 Haha oh god you wouldn't dare
@@themorbidzoo i made several watch the prawn one, I have to lure them in with the Thing video first but I’ll get them to do it.
@@jojomojo712 Lol you're the best
8:00 if i remember right the ghostbusters fought against regulation of their ghost catching weapons that could potentially destroy reality if handeled wrong. and then they do exactly this without knowing for sure if they would destroy the world. maybe over the top comedies are not a good example for making a point about economics?
"The difference is that the Austrian school makes the individual the key unit of decision making..." Sean, that's basically all of economics these days. That's not a difference. - Source: Be me, be economist. Cheers this video is brilliant! Thanks for pointing out education-propaganda and windbaggery!
Lol all economists are dirty collectivists except Austrians
If I end up liking too many of this channel’s videos in the span of the next week or so I apologize I’m in a binge watching kick.
How very dare you give me traffic >:I
I enjoy your videos and intellectual commentary on subjects that hit home for me personally! I had studied economics at a conservative university that touted Austrian school libertarianism and proudly called myself one a few years ago. I didn’t wind down that ideology until I worked in the corporate world and developed a chronic illness that made hospital visits mandatory. Once I started seeing how the “free” corporate market really worked in medical care and the ballooning costs I paid compared to other socialized countries, did I realize that true libertarianism could only stay in academia. I am by no means a communist or radical, but the very basis of free market theory centers around people being rational, and the more i read on economics, poverty studies, and social psychology, the more I became less of a person that believed everyone always made rational decisions for their benefit not could they in times of starving or desperation. And billionaires themselves gamed the system through cronyism, which cannot be stopped by an all-knowing free market, and that being poor wasn’t always just a personal choice.
Excellent video, I really appreciate the sincerity that you argued with. I'm really tired of super cynical criticism that assumes the worst in everything they argue and so your channel as always is a refreshing breath of fresh air please don't stop
Thank you!! My thought is that these people's ideas are bad enough on their own, they really don't need any hyperbole
I just found this channel today and it's so good. These essays are so well written and presented, I've watched like 8 of these videos over the past four hours.
I dont wanna become a cliche and just say something nice on every video but dunking on libertarians is genuinely my favorite passtime to such an extent i focused my college career on it so you force my hand
This is just awesome, amazing work!
You are such a dear. Like a youtube muse. Now I have to know, what did you do in college specifically?
@@themorbidzoo unfortunately i am in covid college right now... but horror movies are my way out of feeling that slow creeping crawl of dread, the bomb above our heads of ecological collapse and the knowledge that anything that I do right now will do nothing to halt that encroaching judgement day... which is why I like your channel!
Oh right my college. I am studying how political dissemination and radicalization occurs through the internet. And a lot of that involves the impact of channels like FEE, Steven Crowder and even PewDiePie on a person's ideology and where those changes take them. Which means it is just so cathartic to watch people just dunk on them for 44 minutes straight.
The topic is so esoteric that I never get the opportunity to like just vent about how much I hate the channels without academic language so this type of video is my muse!!
@@shmuelhoit7118 Oh man, we're like the same person. I too have sunk so far into my dread that all I can do is try to laugh at the circus, and I too study internet ideology! Now is the time to discuss it, it's the forst time in history that the majority of people are able to communicate with thousands outside their immediate area, and we 1000% have not considered the consequences of that yet. At least it's good for content mining on my end, I'm going to talk about these things more, for sure. I'm really glad you're here for it!
@@themorbidzoo yea so now you probably get why when you were like "hey its politics time I'm talking about politics outside of attack on titan now and there will be no survivors" this became my favorite channel
If you're "dunking" on libertarians, I imagine you take a lot of Ls.
Love how he uses Geralt (particularly THAT scene) to depict "rational and irrational decisions." Geralt, a man known for great pragmatism with other things, but when it comes to himself he may as well be riding his horse backwards with a bag on his head. It's what makes Geralt a compelling character. It's what makes good (frustrating) story.
I didn't realize that when Rexy was eating the rich she was doing so in the name of the working class, slay queen!
That first minute was giving me such early Contrapoints vibes. Just needs a prayer to the Dark Mother.
I’m a leftist but Ghostbusters does have a lot of inherent libertarian politics written into the dialogue. That’s a pretty surface level reading.
And the irony is that its whole premise really does not exist.
It's also a comedy, it's supposed to be funny that they kind of know what they're doing and that the EPA is in the wrong. It's supposed to be funny that they discover ghosts are real and Venkman's first thought is how they're going to make a fortune from franchising. I don't think the libertarian stuff was supposed to be serious
@@RogueAstro85yeah it seems like the MOST surface reading level is:
AGHHHHH!!!!! GHOSTS! DEMONS! GODS FROM ANOTHER WORLD!!!! OH GOD! better call those guys in jumpsuits 😏 they got a 1-800 number 😏
I feel like the entire point of the IDW comic series, especially the Ghost Smashers arc, was turning around and pissing all over the first movie's libertarian message. Walter Peck gets put in charge of a new government agency regulating companies that deal with the paranormal and while he and the Ghostbusters still don't get along, he's portrayed way more sympathetically. Instead of a smarmy, bureaucratic obstructionist he's become a hard-nosed disciplinarian who recognizes the value of the service the Ghostbusters provide and is determined to make damn sure they provide it properly, with minimal collateral damage.
If I remember correctly the government was pretty reasonable in being suspicious of the Ghostbusters. Their efforts to shut down the business were comical and exaggerated but rooted in not believing in ghosts. Making the discovery that ghosts are real and turning that into a business to have the monopoly on dealing with the consequences is also not beneficial to society by any stretch so even there the message isn't completely on board with libertarianism.
It has been a while since I watched it so all my points may be wrong, this is just from the bits and pieces I think happened in the movie.
"Short lived series with the Vsauce 2 guy" This is the kind of commentary I became a subscriber for.
I have to say... I'm baffled that hardly anyone online even mentions Lieber having that weird association with libertarian hacks. It's just... there, I guess?
In Australia we have a concept called 'The Pub Test' - a standard for judging policies based on whether the average pub-goer would understand and approve of them. If we were to put Sean to a similar test, like "The Party Test" where the standard is whether a theory is likely to sour the mood at a social gathering, Sean would be asked to leave and receive no further invitation to any future events.
It was a special kind of fascinating when you flowed seamlessly into a poetic story and description of an ineffible malaise from a recognition that's just out of reach, in a 45 minute video about a completely different topic. To add another layer to it, I realized that I had found this video two years ago and was then captivated by the same passage. Maybe the almost-but-not-quite memory of it is what's been bugging me this whole time...
Okay so like i agree fully but also *why is nobody else talking about this*
That monologue was phenomenal, and theres *no* reference to it in the comments wtf!?
your channel is dangerously underrated
Ha thanks, someday I hope someone will call me overrated, then I’ll know I’ve made it 😁
"Skipping leg day infringes upon my civil liberties."
- Benjamin Franklin, probably
I am very much not finished this, but the whole Wakanda thing is funny. It's like the Tories in the UK post-Brexit saying they want to be more like Singapore, and saying that's done through free trade. In actual fact Singapore's economy is VERY protectionist, planned, top-down and their government has very strict control over what goes on in the country. That has made them very rich.
Please fact check yourself
"Countries that dont participate in trade are doomed"
The absolute CAJONES to say that on a movie about fictional sovereign AFRICAN nation.
Would he like to explain to us how or why that is? I'd love to hear him stumble his way through that. What do we do to the global south if they don't play with us, SEAN????!?!??!!
i think what he's saying is that a free market is so vastly superior to any other wealth generation method that it is impossible to compete and thus impossible to survive without trading.......not sure what bringing up the "global south" has to do with any of that
@@007kingifrit What happens when countries don't participate? Do they get out-competed over time or do they get Gaddafi'd instantly? Provide examples please, thank you.
@@bsh819 both depending on how much of a nuisance they are (i can't see my original comment so i have no choice but to guess from context btw)
for example after the korean war for 20 years north korea was a richer place than south korea....now it has totally reversed.
36:55 You basically stated here _exactly_ why I identify as a general leftist, and nothing more specific than that. I'm not an anarchist, I'm not a ML, I'm not a Maoist, I wouldn't even say I'm DemSoc. All I know is I'm somewhere left of SocDem. I don't find subscribing to a particular lane all that useful. We need to be able to adapt and always consider what's best for people both now and down the line, and what that looks like is always going to change. If you get rigid in your thinking then that hammer/nail analogy starts applying--you bend society to fit your solution instead of bending your solution to account for society.
Same with me. In truth I wouldn’t even ascribe myself a label. I guess my position is just “whatever leads to the best material outcomes for the most amount of people” which seems to be somewhere around social democracy.
you're basically saying you don't know what you believe, which should be cause to give yourself some apprehension
@@007kingifrit Why, simply because I don't see the need to limit myself to the rigidity of pre-defined ideologies? I know which direction I want to move material outcomes. I know what rights I would like to see preserved and/or fulfilled. And I have ideas on solutions to these that don't fall under establishment leftist theory, but would be considered leftist in their core philosophy. I am also willing to alter my solutions and try new things as new evidence presents itself. How is that insufficient?
@@Crazy_Diamond_75 you don't need to "limit yourself" meaning you don't feel the need to......actually believe set things?
yes, that's a bad thing, it means you're just gana change what you claim to believe everytime and thus never be wrong. its cowardly and dishonest. its a great way to lie to yourself.
rather the true answer is you DO have a rigid defined ideology like all humans but you are fooling yourself and going "nuh uh i didn't believe that" each time you end up being wrong
I just binged several of your videos, great content. I wish I would’ve found it earlier.
This was a brilliant rebuttal! I love your explanation of art as a party - I never would've thought of it that way, and now I'll probably never stop thinking of it that way.
Libertarians commonly live inside the "faith" of their ideology, it seems. For instance, they glorify private contracts as perfect legal mechanisms which replace the very need for any goverment, but just put to them the very simple question of how on earth any contract can possibly be enforced without a government granted a monopoly on the legal use of force - and watch their heads explode. They can't wrap their minds around the question. As far as they can see, "it'll just sort itself out." On the one hand, they won't admit a truly libertarian society, sans government, would just devolve into "might makes right," because then their ideology looks barbaric. On the other hand, they can't explain what the reasonable, viable alternative is supposed to be without resorting to a model that looks exactly like ... drum roll ... a government granted a monopoly on the legal use of force. Their cognitive dissonance is entertaining, as long as you don't let yourself think about the fact that Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" is former House Speaker Paul Ryan's favorite book and that clown got to make decisions about who could get welfare.
I watch this video every month or two, and I only now realized that Sean's continued complaining about "central planning" is completely at odds with his championing of the entrepreneur.
I don’t know if anyone's told him this, but most businesses have a top-down hierarchy, whether the decision makers are a single owner, partners, or C-suite and board. So, they are centrally planned. And I'm fascinated by the cognitive dissonance that's required to hold such his beliefs.
Let's give some credit to Marxism, as you're supposed to apply historic materialism to do a Marxism right.
True, it's a very good ideal for studying economics! But by itself, historical materialism doesn't mean much besides being a methodological approach-- society is the result of conditions, not ideals. A proper Austrian would say the exact same thing. Sean is a rube who doesn't know what he's talking about, but I guarantee you he wouldn't disagree with that statement either. The counterpoint from an Austrian perspective would be "the conditions of the modern worker are being artificially constrained by government intervention," which is just as unfalsifiable as "the conditions of the modern worker are artificially constrained by capitalism." I happen to suspect that the conditions of the worker are absolutely constrained by capitalism, but unless I can incontrovertibly prove why, my personal beliefs are really not very actionable, and *certainly* not relevant to economics as a field. This is the root of all the circular arguments between communists and capitalists.
@@themorbidzoo very VERY late response but, I agree with the thesis of what you say, yeah. For what is worth, I consider myself a socialist and my perspective is very much informed in Marxism, but I 100% agree that Marxism, or in this case specifically historical materialism, is a method of analysis, and I think that once communists start to treat it like a natural science then they have lost the plot entirely, within Marxism itself even. I am willing to admit that I'm far more partial to a Marxist perspective because I personally have a bias towards the working class (my class, go figure). To the dismay of economists around the world that are bitter about the fact that they can't turn economics into a hard science like physics, economics is a social science, there's perspectives, methods and frameworks that help us make sense of the impossibly complex dynamics society but at some point biases need to take place. Admittedly, I'm not very familiar with Austrian economics, but there are other stuff from Marxism to like, less in the area of economics and more in the area of sociology, like the conflict theory or idea of the structure and super structure
I don't know if I agree with your conclusion, however. That our believes are not really very actionable, at least not in this case, because as you said, is unfalsifiable, we have hit and axiom I think. To prove incontrovertibly if the material conditions of the working class are constrained by capitalism or not is another question in disguise I think: what type of economic system we ought to build, one for the businesses and those who own them (in which case, is already built and the question is do we keep it?) or one for the working class? I'm not convinced we can build one where both interests can be upheld at the same time long term globally, we of course won't be able to find that answer as an absolute fact like we wold if it were a matter of smashing subatomic particles together, none the less, we need to build a society
@@themorbidzoo Also A Very Late Response, but the alligence to falsifiability, that most modern economic thought is based in, as a means to seperate the valid and the invalid or as you say the actionable and the inactionable isn't justifiable. Falsifiabilty conceptually is a means to an end, it's a way of papering over the deeper ideological inconsistencies of Capitalism without having to take a step back and really come to terms with the greater idealistic and material implications of economics as a disciple. Falsifiability allows for a moment to moment pragmatic decision making as generalized economic hueristics fail to account for observed behavior, but is by definition unable to see the forest for the trees. It is unable to as Kuhn put shift the paradigm. To give an example supply and demand as a heuristic works generally but breaks down often when examing a commodity that is required to maintain life if not direct as in the curves no longer match, but practically as food prices become untenably expensive. Falsifiabilty helps with this by providing a frame to build up and around these issues, but falsifiability will never give you the indication that supply and demand applied to commodity is just not a very good heuristic. This inability to creatively its way out of the paper bag is I think serverly overlooked, as bucking falsifiability is akin to bucking the scientific method in economic circles, as far as I am aware ( like Sean I'm not a classically trained economist, just a lowely critical theorist :). I think the parallels that you are drawing in the video and comment between Austrian school and marxist/ Frankfurt school as being unfalsifiable therefore inactionable is jumping the gun so to speak. This dichotomy you are drawing is one based in the idea that Austrian school is on the same ideological scope is reductive even if on the surface they seem equitable, as it equates a specific subset of applicable economic ideals applicable within an economic framework with a school of thought that offers an alternative to the power dynamics and forces present in the former. At some point your pragmatism is going to run up against a systematic problem of having to be based on unfalsifiable ideals that you will be forced to swallow as axiomatic, unless you're a post-structuralist....maybe...probably not. I'll stop here as a youtube comment isn't this serious and should stop taking it as such. P.S. I Just found your channel and I really enjoy it, sorry to leave a sorta schizo comment that is critical on a two year old video, but this point about falsifiability is just one of my bugbears from undergrad that I get irrationally heated about.
@@themorbidzooThis is such an eloquent and intelligent breakdown of the argument from all sides, I feel it should be framed somewhere instead of just hanging around in a comment.
hi! i know some economics and i read capital
-the first "constraint" capitalism forces upon the modern worker is forcing them to become a propertyless worker or starve. see: the enclosures in britain and ireland, and other instances of accumulation at the expense of peasants.
- the second is that capitalists as a whole have to deprive their labor force of compensation for some of their hours worked in order to make a profit at all. the math just doesnt work out otherwise.
-the third is that capitalism creates the conditions for production to be more socialized and collectively organized than at any previous point in history - in fact it is fundamental to the system - but at the same time production's private ownership for profit restrains the potential of this socialization. these tendencies are fundamentally antagonistic, and while the latter can overcome the former, the former cannot overcome the latter.
22:39 "I write almost entirely in a vacuum..."
Yeah, I get that. It's kinda the problem.
R.I.P. Sean
Also, your videos on films are so succinct and to the point and thankfully devoid of the lofi crap most of these channels use. It's becoming a joke how manufactured most of these video essays feel. Keep up the good work, this channel has great content!
Thank you!! Ha, it's gotten to a point where I'll be picking music and think "this is nice" and then "no wait, too lo-fi." There aren't that many video essay cliches but boy is that one of them and boy does Sean love it
@@themorbidzoo I just imagine them sitting in a room full of Kubrick posters, wearing a sleeveless tank top and listening to a poorly mixed dubstep cover of Louis Armstrong they're going to use for the video and saying to themselves "this will totally get me laid".
@@griffin09 😂
This has been in my Watch Later for like a month, but in that time, I saw a bunch of your more recent videos, all of which were pretty tonally different from this one. I love your content and the format in which you present your insights, but this video is probably my favorite you've done. Cheers!
When I first found saw your stuff in my recommended, I expected some cheesy horror channel based on the name. Can't say how glad I am that I was wrong. Great video. You have a fantastic presentation style! I've enjoyed all of your content so far.
We here at The Morbid Zoo consider all monstrosities both real and imagined to be equally cheese. Thanks for watching 😁
My favorite thing about libertarians is how they will almost never acknowledge all the ways corporations and accumulations of Capital are functionally identical to states and are nearly equally capable of tyranny.
"ralph doesnt feel like a bad guy bc he never was one"
???? whfkejdkdj?????? im dying he delivers the line like it's some niche fan theory and not the premise of the movie im so lost
Amazing. I was waiting for you to drop that mic with a, "How do you like them apples?!"
Trade and commerce are the opposite of violence
Yeah, sure. That's why it's been only a couple hundred years since the 'trading' ships stopped pirating others on their way to a port. Cities' walls and guards were (and still are, pretty much) the only thing that kept 'fair traders' from just taking whatever they wished and leave. And even that wasn't a guarantee, as the 'merchants' could bring a few dozens more ships to take the city for the sake of marauding and control.
Oh no, not the Austrian school. They are an embarrassment to economics. Libertarians, please drop these people.
Libertarians should drop their iPhones first and never get them fixed cause they aren’t smart enough to be on the internet
Ugh I was gonna have fun with this but remembering the Austrian school really dulls the enthusiasm
Lmfao
the second worst thing to come out of austria
Why?
It does something to me when she calls the camera "you big dumb dumb."
the nightvale mug
"Hyper-unionization" might be the funniest word ever created.
Showing my own bias here for sure, but the phrase "trade is the opposite of violence" absolutely stunned me. That is such a fundamentally baffling thing to say that I don't know how to respond. Does this man really think that trade is the same thing as community or caring about other people???
@@KiraTesla unironically yes he does 🤡 welcome to Austrian economics!
@@themorbidzoo Dear god.
Is it also a tenet of Austrian economics that it is impossible to dislike someone who is currently at their job? Bc that is the only way I can make sense of thinking that inequality can be solved by everyone thinking of each other as colleagues.
@@KiraTesla an Austrian economist would say that in a free economy, trade would provide for all needs, so like and dislike don’t matter :) :) :)
@@themorbidzoo Thank you so much for your insight, I need to go put my brain in a goldfish bowl so it can swim around and be cleansed of this nightmare.
Wait, this is a real, subsidized foundation? I thought it was just the name of his channel… 😒
Edit: Damn, they're even on Wiki. "…founded in 1946, is considered the oldest free-market think tank in the United States." 🤷♂
Yup, they suck
There are a lot of these. Capitalists spend a lot of money on people who tell workers life will be better for workers if capitalists are allowed to do whatever they want.
I always thought it was hilarious that he used literal dinosaur ancapistan as a critique of socialism.
INSANE you haven't blown up yet I am loving ur content
Thanks so much 😊 I just need to upload more, I think
In several small businesses I helped run we would never ask "How can we create value for the customer?" LOL it sounds childishly earnest. We might ask "WHAT DO WE SAY when the customer asks how we create value for them?", or how do we get them to think we create value. (even though a lot of times the answer was to actually provide more value)
"Business" (as in "doing business") is almost entirely about using information, financial, or power asymmetries to get extra value. Advertising is entirely about that, and is a drain on society (assuming all that artistic genius still gets expressed in some form). I think of that as close to a definition, because when you are simply about creating value, you are not "doing business", you are just working. Everything else you do that's not that, ends up being some form of asymmetry exploitation.
"Business" is the part of work/productive life that effectively makes capitalism feel different for the average worker, and it's just the result of the legal system regulating business and private property (not to mention the tax system) encourages ownership of all business by a ever-concentrating group of megawealthy. There's nothing more "natural" or "free" about our system. Rather, it was designed, usually explicitly, to try and balance competing forces at different time periods, or reflect the desires of a newly dominant class or group.
💯
Late to this party, but I find it so hilarious/frustrating that people miss the toddler level symbolism in Jurassic Park. I don't know how much more simply you can put "We will be destroyed by the monsters we create when we turn to science for reckless profiteering".
sorta, i think its saying science without morality is a bad thing
You do such a great job debunking the FEE guy (srsly thank you) but i would like to point out that there is also some unexamided ideology in this video.
I just have to point out that the "problem" with capitalism, as far as its critics are concerned, is not that people cheat the system. The problem is that it depends on exploitation to work.
Also, and this is something really endemic in anglophone UA-cam, Marxism in general is not as frowned upon in academia as you make it seem. Outside the US - where people are ideologically indisposed to it - Marxism is not frowned upon at all. It is a legitimate form of criticism and some of Marx's ideas are foundational to Sociology as a scientific field. (Meanwhile Liberalism gets great treatment despite being philosophically moribund for 50 years)
Please do jot take this as an attack, and keep making great content
@@ericlk47 there are things in this video I’d revise 4 years later, thanks for the watch and comment :)
I agree with one of your central arguments about films not being 1:1 replica of reality. It reminded me of Bordwell who wrote about various criteria when judging the film - among them two which are common among lay people watching films just for fun, without any deeper analysis: moral criteria and realistic criteria. I think this guy is stuck with these when he's doing his analysis - it's like watching historian talking very negatively about lord of the rings or even some good historical pic because it's nor "realistic". This guy is also adding his moral criteria of free-market utopia propaganda and and its promises of individual freedom and prosperity. And he just don't see things like complexity of film or innovation, coherence etc. - actually analysing it as an art form, you know, the thing it is meant to be.
18:35
"JOHN"
The exasperation in your voice is my favorite thing ever gee freaking whiz
I love the way you say "Sean" like it's a bad word, it made this video even more fun to watch. 10/10.
I've watched this so many times and its still just so good
Hahaha I’m honored to be part of the rotation thank u
You are the most iconic film/video essayist I’ve ever had the privilege of seeing. This is like peak content, and I know it’s like old stuff but like holy fuck this was so well written
The subtle socialism of Jurassic Park, I mean it is a criticism of free market venture capitalism
Guess he didn't make it as a musician because he believes a band is an affiliation of individuals playing simultaneous solos at all times.
10/10, awesome video. The absurdity of this guy is appreciated to know end.
That guy is truly terrible at trying to make thought provoking content but thinks he's killing it. Amazing
It's wild how much of a time capsule this video is and it's only 3 years old!
Came for The Thing Video, stayed for this.
23:06 for example. I recently had to take a macroeconomics course, a topic I never had interest in. Now I have a better understanding of the world we live in! And now I’m watching videos like this!! And now I want to take microeconomics! I never thought I’d like econ cause it’s math! YET HERE I AM
This video reminded me of how incredibly stupid and insufferable I was as a 20 something. Libertarians are the ultimate cringe.
Yes. And yes, 'Chef' is a truly dreadful movie, except it's less a movie than an ad for Twitter.
Stumbled on your video by accident. I feel less sad after watching it. It's nice.
I knew this was going to be a good video when it opened on the Aldi wine.
"trade and commerce are the opposite of violence" Famously the US has engaged in little warfare over the prestigious resource of oil
It's interesting though now that he mentions it that one of the villains of the original "Ghost Busters" which came out right in the middle of the Reagan administration (a time when the solar panels Carter installed on the White House roof were ripped down mind you) was a somewhat foppish member of the EPA who has the absolute audacity to be concerned that a building in the middle of one of the busiest cities on the planet is omitting high amounts of radiation & at the end the self made business men not only save the day, one of them also gets the girl they never would in real life & are beloved the world over & one of our heroes is more concerned about the giant stay puffed marshmallow man damaging a church than all the other meham & destruction it's causing. Tim Heidecker once pointed out in an interview that Reagan era comedies often made us root for protagonists who were huge jerks, rather than making them the butt of jokes like with "It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia" two decades later. When you consider these facts it's really no huge surprise that a libertarian would use this film as an example in his video, or that a bunch of right-wing trolls would get all bent out of shape about an all female reboot.🙄
Everyone pretends to drink in their video essays, but few manage to do it so convincingly, and still stay on point! Kudos!
Benjamin Franklin once said, "Hey, I never said that. Stop misquoting me!"
You're so delightfully drunk in this video.
The problem with a complete free market is that it allows to much room for a corporation to find loopholes in the already loose regulations we have. The idea of “Private ownership” only works and makes sense in the context of a small, family owned business that only has at most a dozen or so employees, not for these mega companies and corporations who have the workforce the size of some smaller countries.
There needs to be some government intervention in order to make sure everyone’s rights and equalities are protected. Saying that regulating the “free market” is bad is like saying “laws” are bad because they regulate people.
Gotta love how it's "bad" for the government to regulate the ghostbusters who not only have actual nuclear weapons but also literally made a business out of catching and imprisoning human souls.
Out of Frame sounds like they'd be Renegade Cut's arch nemesis in "Mortal Kombat: UA-cam Essayists"
That Johnny Harris-esque, video essayist, pouty tone Sean uses makes my skin crawl.
I bet he has videos gushing about how much he loves those awful Atlas Shrugged movies.
I remember those films had a different main character actress even tho the character was the same. 3 films, 3 different leading ladies playing the same person.
I know this is off topic but that lip color is just awesome! I wanted something like that for myseld
"Those who sacrifise there ferdom for liberty desrve needer" Ban Franklyne
🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🫡
This is one of my favourite videos on UA-cam. Thanks
Love the video, but this guy's arguments are so out there. What weird points to have to dismantle.
I remember reading an anarcho capitalist book called Restoring The American Dream by a chap named Robert Ringer. It's one of the best pieces of lurid, sensationalist fiction I've read. Better than Robert E. Howard's Conan stories.
Love how drunk you look in this but still perfectly coherent
I wonder how many people in his audience put their "Don't tread on me" bumper sticker next to their "Thin blue line" bumper sticker...